named.root

[Petri Helenius-2]

Any chance the recent root zone changes would make it to 7.0?

Pete

_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"

[dougb]

Petri Helenius wrote:
>
> Any chance the recent root zone changes would make it to 7.0?

I will certainly prepare the change request and submit it to re@.
However please understand that this is a very low priority issue. The
first thing a resolving name server does when starting up is to use
the addresses in the root hints file to query a root server to update
its local cache of the root zone. It only needs to find ONE good
address in that file to accomplish this.

Doug

--

     This .signature sanitized for your protection
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"

[Kevin Oberman]

> Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 11:26:29 -0800

> From: Doug Barton <[hidden email]>
> Sender: [hidden email]
>
> Petri Helenius wrote:
> >
> > Any chance the recent root zone changes would make it to 7.0?
>
> I will certainly prepare the change request and submit it to re@.
> However please understand that this is a very low priority issue. The
> first thing a resolving name server does when starting up is to use
> the addresses in the root hints file to query a root server to update
> its local cache of the root zone. It only needs to find ONE good
> address in that file to accomplish this.
>
> Doug
>
> --
>
>      This .signature sanitized for your protection
> _______________________________________________
> [hidden email] mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
>

Doug,

This is both true and false because an IPv6 only DNS server (this may be
an imaginary entity) will not find any root servers without the
new file. I think it is probably not high priority, but is of MUCH
higher then the typical root list since it can have a real impact.
--
R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer
Energy Sciences Network (ESnet)
Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab)
E-mail: [hidden email] Phone: [phone]
Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4  EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751

[dougb]

Kevin Oberman wrote:

> Doug,
>
> This is both true and false because an IPv6 only DNS server (this may be
> an imaginary entity)

It is. Modulo some theoretical exercise being performed by people who
are smart enough to know how to prime them already, there are no
IPv6-only name servers. Even though the root is ready now, only 112 of
the 281 TLDs have IPv6 glue of any sort. The IPv6-only Internet is a
long way away.

Now everything I just said will become less true going forward, which
is why I said I will do the change request ASAP. But it's still not
urgent, and any impact that not doing the change tomorrow might have
is so minimal as to be basically immeasurable.

Doug

--

     This .signature sanitized for your protection
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"

[Kevin Oberman]

> Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 14:41:14 -0800

> From: Doug Barton <[hidden email]>
>
> Kevin Oberman wrote:
>
> > Doug,
> >
> > This is both true and false because an IPv6 only DNS server (this may be
> > an imaginary entity)
>
> It is. Modulo some theoretical exercise being performed by people who
> are smart enough to know how to prime them already, there are no
> IPv6-only name servers. Even though the root is ready now, only 112 of
> the 281 TLDs have IPv6 glue of any sort. The IPv6-only Internet is a
> long way away.
>
> Now everything I just said will become less true going forward, which
> is why I said I will do the change request ASAP. But it's still not
> urgent, and any impact that not doing the change tomorrow might have
> is so minimal as to be basically immeasurable.

Doug,

I agree. That's why I said that it is not high-priority, but I wanted to
make people aware that this was not just the usual case when a root
server moves to a new address.

I do suspect that there may be real IPv6 only DNS servers out there,
but, if they exist, they are probably in China and will never point at
the real root servers.
--
R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer
Energy Sciences Network (ESnet)
Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab)
E-mail: [hidden email] Phone: [phone]
Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4  EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751

[Wilkinson, Alex]

    0n Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 06:45:13PM +0200, Petri Helenius wrote:

    >Any chance the recent root zone changes would make it to 7.0?

Erm, curious, what where these changes in the first place ?

 -aW

IMPORTANT: This email remains the property of the Australian Defence Organisation and is subject to the jurisdiction of section 70 of the CRIMES ACT 1914.  If you have received this email in error, you are requested to contact the sender and delete the email.


_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"

[Tom Evans-3]

On Thu, 2008-02-07 at 20:48 +0900, Wilkinson, Alex wrote:
> 0n Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 06:45:13PM +0200, Petri Helenius wrote:
>
>     >Any chance the recent root zone changes would make it to 7.0?
>
> Erm, curious, what where these changes in the first place ?
>
>  -aW
>
>
From cvs-all:

dougb       2008-02-07 06:28:02 UTC

  FreeBSD src repository

  Modified files:
    etc/namedb           named.root
  Log:
  From the 4 February 2008 update:
  IPv6 addresses for 6 of the root name servers!
 
  Revision  Changes    Path
  1.14      +8 -3      src/etc/namedb/named.root

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/etc/namedb/named.root.diff?r1=1.13;r2=1.14;f=h